What was the purpose of the 40 min French scene?

what was the purpose of the 40 min French scene?

Other urls found in this thread:

drive.google.com/open?id=0B0KUPZ4FldqHd2dmODdFaWw2d0U
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Historical context

It's kino. You either understand it or you don't.

but is it remotely possible that some fancy French family could really live in comfort amidst the war and especially deep in North Vietnamese territory?

The more they move up the river the more insane it gets. The French stuck in the 50's was meant to be out of place.

it was to point out that Vietnamese people hated white people because of the French not because of Americans
they would have probably become decent Americans and learned to enjoys brews, burgers and baseball but because of the French with their wine and cheese faggotry, the hatred was already too entrenched and we were forced to kill a million gooks

wtf I hate French now

>watching Redux

it was an accident but I thought I might as well stick with it. Are the French in the original cut at all?

I... Don't remember this scene?

No. The original cut is just so much better. Redux meanders so much on so many things that should have been cut. Just for reference, Redux was released in 2001, long after Coppola lost his mind and started shitting out cinematic garbage.

It's essentially the Star Wars Special Edition re-release of Apocalypse Now.

>you'll never see the 280 min workprint

Go fuck yourself

drive.google.com/open?id=0B0KUPZ4FldqHd2dmODdFaWw2d0U

It does look like complete shit though

Why is the quality so shit for a work print?

youre right except for the star wars part

probably ripped off a film roll or something

ANT VUN ZAT LUVS

Til americans don't know the role of France in Indochina.

that's how I learned about it.

100% accurate

Not a clue. I don't even know how I found it.

I think the whole point of sending martin sheen after him was that Kurtz was no longer in Vietnam but has his camp across the border in cambodia, which also used to be a french colony, so probably

Was the character a bit underwhelming?
>lol I'm insane and I have malaria ayyy lmao

If you think of Apocalypse Now as a retelling of the Odyssey, then things make more sense.

French Indochina. Google it.

Colonel dubs

The main theme is madness.

To bore us to death.
Apocalypse Now is probably the most overrated piece of shit I've ever seen in my life.

>tfw i actually liked the french plantation scenež

but i do agree that redux muddles up the movie

It's in the special "redux" edition

This is why I love AN. Its a no-fail pleb filter.

Don't you think Colonel Quads?

It's not in the original release for a reason. It's Coppola going back and tryin to romanticize about the Vietnam war, which is why it's a terrible addition to the movie. The great thing about aopocalypse now is it's singular narrative. Like heart of darkness, EVERYTHING is building up to the meeting with Kurtz. The French scene is some bullshit with its message delivered so ham-fistedly.

Redux never should have happened.

I remember some interview where Coppola described directing Apocalypse Now as something where he slowly realized he and the team were making a "surreal movie" as time went on. Like he didn't know what he was doing at first and the famous tone of film arrived organically.

Maybe that scene is a vestigial part where the film was more of a conventional historical drama and less a fever trip.

This

>40 min French scene

wut. well shit i downloaded a wrong torrent

The conversation is superior

>he unironically thinks AN is a "HoD" adaptation

Why is Sup Forums so uncultured?

Yup. This is what happens when an actor is left to ad-lib/write his own lines.

No. you downloaded the right one. The French scene is crap in context and the version it's in never should have been released.

Honestly imo yes, but who's going to have the balls to say it in real life?

Fortunately the character is such an empty vessel that it doesn't matter if, say, Brando doesn't seem that insane or dangerously intelligent. And the cambodian extras with the animal sacrifice make up the difference.

The purpose of the French scene is Genesis.

Much of the film is about what the Americans are doing in Vietnam in the first place. You cannot have that discussion, without making a statement about the origin, the French Colonization.

The scene is brilliant. The fact that the French aren't really French. They consider themselves Cambodian/Vietnamese. The true horror of being a native in a foreign country, where the only thing they can do is perish. That land was never going to be theirs, even though they owned it by law and force.

And this is before we get into the ideological discussion they had at the dinner table, and the crazy, sex-starved woman whose husband died, and is trapped with her family eternally on that plantation.

Basically, the scene informs how you should interpret Willard's journey and character. There's absolutely no ambiguity as to why the scene was cut from the film; because it is out of time and out of place (which is what it was meant to be), and it was so long, it is the first thing you leave on the cutting room floor if you have to cut something out of the film.

People who argue against it are those who either:

a) did not understand it
b) do not want the scene to contradict their own interpretation of the film, which is ultimately erroneous, as the scene proves they're wrong

but im le tired

>He thinks Apocalypse Now is about the Vietnam War.
One of the most basic pleb filters.

no

The theatrical cut wasn't. Because that would've gone against the western cold war narratives.

Redux is about the vietnam war.

They're completely different movies with completely different themes and ideas on display.